Longsio v. Astrue et al
Plaintiff: David Longsio
Defendant: Michael Astrue
Case Number: 0:2009cv00920
Filed: April 21, 2009
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: St. Louis
Presiding Judge: Mayeron
Presiding Judge: Rosenbaum
Nature of Suit: Social Security: DIWC/DIWW
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 28, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 22 ORDER denying plaintiff's 6 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting defendant's 9 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting Magistrate Judge's 13 Report and Recommendation. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on September 28, 2010. (DML)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Longsio v. Astrue et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Michael Astrue
Represented By: Lonnie F Bryan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: David Longsio
Represented By: Lionel H Peabody
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?